Seen Protege? - top level is 'Thing'. They were talking of making other
'things' possible for the base class though - for RDF's benefit.
From another point of view, in the RDF Java API (org.w3c.rdf.*) the top
interface is RDFNode, with subinterfaces Literal, Model, Resource, SetModel,
Statement, VirtualModel. (can't remember URL, sorry)
Think you're off the mark though - without a name, anonymous, ok. But things
without an identity, no-things?
But I'm probably going to get slapped and told to read an advanced
philosophy book...
If you take a look at the issue tracking [1], 'Resource' gets it's name in
lights quite a lot.
[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking
---
Danny Ayers
http://www.isacat.net
<- -----Original Message-----
<- From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
<- [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Seth Russell
<- Sent: 09 April 2001 00:08
<- To: RDF-IG
<- Subject: Can Resource be the top of our ontology ?
<-
<-
<- Here, AFIK, thanks to Aaron Swartz's scholarship,
<- is the ~official~ definition of "Resource".
<-
<- <q cite="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt">
<- Resource
<- A resource can be anything that has identity. Familiar
<- examples include an electronic document, an image, a service
<- (e.g., "today's weather report for Los Angeles"), and a
<- collection of other resources. Not all resources are network
<- "retrievable"; e.g., human beings, corporations, and bound
<- books in a library can also be considered resources.
<-
<- The resource is the conceptual mapping to an entity or set of
<- entities, not necessarily the entity which corresponds to that
<- mapping at any particular instance in time. Thus, a resource
<- can remain constant even when its content---the entities to
<- which it currently corresponds---changes over time, provided
<- that the conceptual mapping is not changed in the process.
<- </q>
<-
<- But I would like to observe that Resources as defined above do
<- not function
<- nicely as the only valid top of our ontology; whereas Thing(s)
<- do. Here are
<- my reasons:
<-
<- 1) The definition itself implies that there are things which can have no
<- identity by saying: "A resource can be anything that has
<- identity". So what
<- happens when we must talk of things with no identity? Are these
<- things to
<- have no ontological status? Can I not describe a dust mite that
<- was present
<- in the room in which I was born; or would I have to name the
<- bugger first?
<-
<- 2) We desperately need a way to distinguish between a thing and its model
<- inside a system. We need to make the age old distinction between a
<- territory and it's map. I don't see how to do this using the
<- definition of
<- Resource above. An entire RDF node (all triples with the same subject)
<- function to model or represents something ... yet it obviously is not the
<- thing it models and represents. We need a way to distinguish between the
<- thing itself and the RDF node which represents it within our computer
<- networks. The definition above seems to provide no way to make that
<- distinction; since everything it recognizes in it's ontology is
<- a Resource.
<-
<- What am I missing ?
<-
<- But on the other hand if we use Thing as the top of our ontology
<- we can say
<- that Resources are either things like electronic documents or RDF
<- descriptions indside the computer network ... something like ...
<-
<- language: Semenglish
<- Thing
<- description "The top of our ontology";
<- scope "Nothing is excluded. Things even include those things that
<- represent other things".
<- Resource
<- subClass Thing;
<- containedIn (a computer network).
<- RDFdescription
<- subClass Resource;
<- comment "A set of RDF statements with the same subject";
<- seeAlso "RDF node", Symbol;
<- represent [a Thing];
<- model [ a Thing];
<- (can be identified by) URI.
<- ElectronicDocuments
<- subClass Resource;
<- (can be identified by) URI.
<-
<- Seth
<- (wants to discuss) Pentuples;
<- (wants to collaborate on) SEM.
<- Pentuples
<- see http://robustai.net/mentography/pentuples.gif ;
<- comment "Are not meant as a replacement or extension of RDF";
<- comment "Pentuples are a proposal for an internal data structure";
<- (internal data structure of) SEM.
<- SEM
<- label "Semantic Memory".
<-
<-
<-